Saturday, October 3, 2015




It is foolish to react to people who carry jaundiced views. Journalism, as it evolved over a period, carrieD some ethos even now. It has certain framework to work within,. That is why, in journalism the news editors are called "gate keepers", those that do not allow unethical people with unethical views enter the news. This serves two purposes. First it is in the national interest and the other it defines the ethical values of the news paper and its owners. Columnists are independent thinking, intellectual and erudite scholars. Thy do not pick one Sloka here, one Commandment there or one Tenet somewhere. They read the whole Book or a whole lot of different books on a subject before they frame an opinion, think a lot before they put it on paper and review it once it is published and remove it if it is found the views are wrong.

But today's journalism is sold out. It is auctioned in the political market. Journalists have become news peddlers instead of news feeders. News Papers have become dens of lies, places for political debauchery and money spinning businesses.

Bammera Pothanamtya, who has penned the famous Sreemad Andhra Maha Bhagavatam, in Telugu in melodious poems, decides to dedicate it to Lord Sree Rama. His brother-in-law, his wife's brother, who can not bear to see the penury of his sister and her children advises Potana to dedicate it to the local Prince and live happily with the boons he will confer on him. But Potana refuses and tells thus. (In Telugu)

బాలరసాలసాలనవపల్లవ కోమల కావ్యకన్యకం
గూళలకిచ్చి యప్పడుఁపు గూడు భుజించుటకంటె సత్కవుల్
హాలికులైననేమి గహనాంతరసీమలఁ గందమూల కౌ
ద్దాలికులైననేమి నిజ దార సుతోదర పోషణార్ధమై.
“It is better for a Satkavi (good poet), to be a farmer or even to dig roots and beets in the forest to support his wife and children than to give(dedicate) his literary work – which is like his own daughter – to undeserving persons and eat the food got from that.”
In a way he tells Sreenadha, "I do not want to live on the blood money earned by my precious daughter by selling her body and soul to a a King that does not deserve it". Journalists are doing exactly the same now a days. They are selling souls to undeserving people. 
An unfortunate incident has happened in a UP Village. Some opportunistic youth, two of them as per UP Police version, (now, they are caught as per news, but no more information why they have done the act) forced the Priest of the Temple to announce that a certain family ate beef the day of a festival. Hundreds people collected at his house, dragged him and killed him. It is heinous. It is not known why a man kills a man and why a man should kill an animal too. It is not understandable why an animal like cow that gives us milk, the most nutrient food, is killed when it is healthy too. It is inhuman and wild animal behavior to say the least. But food is preference of people. We shall leave that at it. If we do not like animals to be killed, we say that and leave it there.
But we are out of traditional foods and are after fast foods, Fast foods are spicier than the food made by mother. 
As per UP Police there may be various reasons behind the killing of the man.
1. There may be previous animosity, that the police, prima facie rule out on primary investigation.
2. Rumor may have been spread by anti-social elements to foment trouble in view of the ensuing Assembly elections in states. This may have been done by any side of the political spectrum.
3. There is a rumor that the calf killed is stolen and may have been valued at Rs.1.50 lakhs and hence, it is an act of rage. 
4. The fourth, the most unlikely may be, it is communal act. But villagers, including Muslims say, they never have had any fight on religion.
But Media jumped at the drop of a hat. They started attributing motives. They identified the reasons and the culprits. Police are still groping in dark who the youth that have provoked the killing are. What is their religion, caste, creed, political affiliation etc.,? Is some big fish behind them? Do they belong to the rightist or leftist or centrist groups? Yesterday, in Oregaon, USA, a single gunman killed score of youth, first asking them, "Are you Christian?" Does it make him an anti-Christ? Only FBI can tell. Not the Media.

Adding fuel to the fire has become order of the day by the Media. Many on Social Media too fall prey to the campaign, that is often one sided, and pass judgments one way or the other. They do not understand the damage they do to the body politic. Here, I will narrate one very serious communal riot, that I witnessed, in 1984 in Hyderabad from my Branch Premises of the Bank. That day we declared the Branch closed on police warning, but we were inside the Bank as one Senior Executive was in town to inquire into allegations of impropriety in the accounts of one Construction Company and we had to stay back. By 1 PM, when prayers were over it spread like wild fire. We saw with our eyes, police prompting the agitators to burn vehicles, shops etc. The reason was , the usurper of NTR's CM post, wanted to retain it at any cost quoting the unrest as reason as he was already advised to step down in view of the sympathy being gained by NTR. It was given a communal color. Pitched battles went on. Stabbing spree continued. All this was done in filmy style. Many parts in new city too were under curfew. By the time reason dawned on the state, damage was done. He resigned. But how many people were massacred? And our famous Journalist, (she calls herself so, I doubt) writes a column in Times of India today that 56" chest is responsible for the lynching of a man. Atrocious, to say the least. And the news paper should be ashamed to publicize such hate-filled column. 
I usually do not react to what nincompoops say. But this woman started preaching Hinduism to Hindus. Ironic! She headlined it " Liberal Hindus, arise; Reclaim your faith from extremists" (The Capital R was wrong grammatically and our Journos are from USA). First, it surprises me why she says, "Your Faith". So, she is not a Hindu by faith. She has no locus standi on passing judgment on Hinduism. Hinduism is as deep as the deepest Ocean that ever existed on the Universe. What she knows may be a molecule of water in the ocean. But she divides Hinduism into liberal and extreme. Rama was liberal. Ravana was extreme. Pandavas were liberal, Kauravas were extreme. Dharmo Rakshati Rakshitaha. The man who protects Dharma , Dharma will protect him. Hindus believe in this Tenet. Till the time the sins of any extremist group in any faith are totally ripe, action will not come. Hinduism absorbed all faiths because of this only. We leave the Karma part to the Unknown. We have no God or Messenger of God., We worship nature. So we have so many Gods. Hindus see Lakshmi in a coin, Saraswati in a piece of Paper and Shakthi in every woman. It is vast, the likes Sagarika Ghose take lakhs of births to understand. But she quotes.
She quotes Rig Veda. "Ekam Sat Vipraha Bahuda Vadanti" Truth is one but people call it differently. Her own Veda says Lies are many but all Media men/women tell all lies as one. She calls it modern secularism. Except in India, no where in the world, the word secularism was so misused. Secularism in the real context is "non-interference of state in religious matters". It has nothing to do with Religion or God, one or many. It is a definition of the relationship between Religion and State. I do not know the size of the brain of the author, but it has no substance, it seems by this twisted analogy. At this point she may have remembered her husband and Madison Square, has become mad and she declares that Extremists in Indian Hinduism want another Lebanon here. Hopefully, her husband is not one of them .This is ridiculous. If India wanted to be Lebanon, it could have become one when Muslim marauders invaded and plundered our nation. It would have become one, when women unable to bear the molestation by these goons, committed Sati, that the liberals termed as superstition. (Sati did not originate in India, it was prevalent in other countries hundreds of years before it entered India ). We could have become a Lebanon, the day Rani Jhansi revolted on British. We could have become one, on the day of Jallianwala Bagh massacre. We could have become one in 1965 war, 1971 war. But we absorbed all faiths. The country is not riven apart by any militant group from any religion. And this lady takes immense pleasure in bashing Hinduism. The last sentence of the para refers to multiple truths of Santan Dharma. She starts with One Truth, Ekam Sat and ends with many truths Bahuda Sat". I told you, for them lies are part of life.
The lynching of a human being, is horrendous. Why should Hindus bow in shame when truth is yet to be established by the Police? As I stated earlier a riot can be engineered for political reasons. It can be engineered to save one's seat. It can be engineered to defame a Statesmen. They knew well it was done to defame Gandhi in 1947-48 and earlier. Why do you give a religious color to an unfortunate incident even before Police are unable to find truth? Is it not anti-national? Now, Lady, tell me. Who wants Lebanbon, you  or the Hindus? She asks "Where is the tradition of vaad, vivad and samvaad?" You know only to create vivad. vaad and samvaad are beyond your realm. You are like the lady Liberal who tweets, "I ate beef, murder me" Who can kill the brain dead? Not even the God! These are done about Absolute Truth not about blatant lies. Hope you get the point.
In the next part she uses her negative journalistic talent to create sympathy for the family. Who will not sympathize? Killers do not belong to one religion. And in this case we do not know the real conspirators. Hindus pray God after sneezing as they feel they may have killed numerous unseen living beings in the air. That is our ethos. That is our love for all things living. And, note, there no illiberal Hindus. Some try to protect themselves and some try to counter attack. If counter attack is militancy, Rama and Pandavas were extremists. They killed sinners. In this case we can not pass that judgment as we do not yet know what exactly has happened. It may be rage, suspicion, old enmity or conspiracy of politicos to divide society for immediate benefits. You too do not judge, Sagarika. You are not qualified for that. 
She quotes Vivekananda. She did not read Vivekananda at all. He debunked the five myths on Hinduism while traveling extensively in America. Hope she reads before quoting. Dr. Sarvepally Radhakrishnan, ex-Vice-President and renowned Hindu Philosopher  sates,
“The West tried its best to persuade India that its philosophy is absurd, its art puerile, its poetry uninspired, its religion grotesque and its ethics barbarous”.

We are not barbarians as made out by you. We are the most civilized of all religions in the world.

"The motives for classical imperialism were frequently associated with the three G’s - Gold, God and Glory., says Robin W Winks." This contrast is enough to silence you.

Then she goes on misinterpreting the Mahabharata and the Gita and compares Godse to a non-believer in Hinduism. Reason why Godse killed Gandhi was more political than religious. Though killing was wrong, Godse said he killed Gandhi for national pride. And in Mahabharata Lord Krishna says all are killed by "ME" and Arjuna was only killing the killed. That is the essence. Please do not distort our scriptures. Lord Krishna tells if it is ordained in your duty to kill your close ones too, kill them. It not a sin as SIN is ME. That does not give right to a mob to kill a reportedly innocent civilian., That does not also give right to Sagarika or her ilk to pass judgement on the identity of the killers even before Police do so. Can we forget the ordeal of Arushi murder case with Media trial?
She shifts gear to Modi and blabbers. Not needed to reply as this is her bread and breath. Then she says Vivekananda opposed superstition. Instead, he tried to explain each Hindu ritual  and explained the rationale. Hope she sits in any Vivekananda Library and read. Or if she visits my house, I will provide numerous works of and by him. 
The final point is her knowledge of Constitution. She says cow slughter ban was directive principle and not judiciable. Preamble too is not, where the word secularism appears and it is not supported by any law too. Reservations too are directive principles. But both reservations and cow slaughter are supported by various acts by the Centre and States. They became Acts, that are subject to judicial scrutiny. If cow slaughter can not be implemented by her logic, reservations too can not be. 
So much so, Sagarika W/O Rajdeep Sardesai. I wasted lot of time on your stupid article. But someone shared it on my Twitter Account, believing what you said and wanted to clear air. Do not write on any subject without reading it properly.

"Satyam Vada, Dharmam Chara" means say truth and tread the path of Dharma. It does not mean "Satyam Vadha and Darmam Chera",  "Kill Truth and Jail Dharma" Please do not distort truth for your lively hood.


prajñānam brahma - "Prajña is Brahman or "Brahman is Prajña" (Aitareya Upanishad 3.3 of the Rig Veda

ayam ātmā brahma - "This Self (Atman) is Brahman" (Mandukya Upanishad 1.2 of the Atharva Veda 

tat tvam asi - "Thou art That" (Chandogya Upanishad 6.8.7 of the Sama Veda)

aham brahmāsmi - "I am Brahman", or "I am Divine" (Brhadaranyaka Upanishad)